Cancel Agent Job

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark the operation as destructive and idempotent, and the description echoes 'idempotent' while adding the 'authorized' qualifier. It does not describe what cancellation actually does to the job or what state changes occur, so added transparency beyond annotations is limited.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is one concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It front-loads the key action and object, making it quickly scannable for an agent.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, idempotent operation with two required parameters including a nested workspace object, the one-sentence description is minimal. The output schema and annotations help, but the description still leaves gaps around authorization, failure behavior, and what cancellation implies for the job's lifecycle.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 50%; workspace has a description but job_id does not. The tool description does not explain either parameter in detail, nor does it connect 'one ... durable job' to job_id or workspace meaning, so it fails to compensate for the low coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Request idempotent cancellation') and a clear resource ('one authorized durable job'). The verb 'cancel' distinguishes this tool from sibling agent_* tools such as agent_start, agent_status, and agent_continue.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The intended use is implied: cancel a durable job. However, the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like agent_fork or agent_continue, and it does not mention prerequisites or conditions for cancellation.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.